CHAPTER 20.

OF CIVIL GOVERNMENT.

This chapter consists of two principal heads,óI. General discourse on
the necessity, dignity, and use of Civil Government, in opposition to the
frantic proceedings of the Anabaptists, sec. 1ñ3. II. A special
exposition of the three leading parts of which Civil Government consists, sec.
4ñ32.

The first part treats of the function of Magistrates, whose authority and
calling is proved, sec. 4ñ7. Next, the three Forms of civil government
are added, sec. 8. Thirdly, Consideration of the office of the civil magistrate
in respect of piety and righteousness. Here, of rewards and
punishmentsóviz. punishing the guilty, protecting the innocent,
repressing the seditious, managing the affairs of peace and war, sec.
9ñ13. The second part treats of Laws, their utility, necessity, form,
authority, constitution, and scope, sec. 14ñ16. The last part relates to
the People, and explains the use of laws, courts, and magistrates, to the
common society of Christians, sec. 17ñ21. Deference which private
individuals owe to magistrates, and how far obedience ought to be carried, sec.
22ñ32.

Sections.

1. Last part of the whole work, relating to the institution of Civil
Government. The consideration of it necessary. 1. To refute the Anabaptists. 2.
To refute the flatterers of princes. 3. To excite our gratitude to God. Civil
government not opposed to Christian liberty. Civil government to be
distinguished from the spiritual kingdom of Christ.

2. Objections of the Anabaptists. 1. That civil government is unworthy of a
Christian man. 2. That it is diametrically repugnant to the Christian
profession. Answer.

3. The answer confirmed. Discourse reduced to three heads, 1. Of Laws. 2. Of
Magistrates. 3. Of the People.

4. The office of Magistrates approved by God. 1. They are called Gods. 2. They
are ordained by the wisdom of God. Examples of pious Magistrates.

5. Civil government appointed by God for Jews, not Christians. This objection
answered.

6. Divine appointment of Magistrates. Effect which this ought to have on
Magistrates themselves.

7. This consideration should repress the fury of the Anabaptists.

8. Three forms of civil government, Monarchy, Aristocracy, Democracy.
Impossible absolutely to say which is best.

9. Of the duty of Magistrates. Their first care the preservation of the
Christian religion and true piety. This proved.

10. Objections of Anabaptists to this view. These answered.

11. Lawfulness of War.

12 Objection, that the lawfulness of war is not taught in Scripture. Answer.

13. Right of exacting tribute and raising revenues.

14. Of Laws, their necessity and utility. Distinction between the Moral,
Ceremonial, and Judicial Law of Moses.

15. Sum and scope of the Moral Law. Of the Ceremonial and Judicial Law.
Conclusion.

16. All Laws should be just. Civil Law of Moses; how far in force, and how far
abrogated.

17. Of the People, and of the use of laws as respects individuals.

18. How far litigation lawful.

19. Refutation of the Anabaptists, who condemn all judicial proceedings.

20. Objection, that Christ forbids us to resist evil. Answer.

21. Objection, that Paul condemns law-suits absolutely. Answer.

22. Of the respect and obedience due to Magistrates.

23. Same subject continued.

24. How far submission due to tyrants.

25. Same continued.

26. Proof from Scripture.

27. Proof continued.

28. Objections answered.

29. Considerations to curb impatience under tyranny.

30. Considerations considered.

31. General submission due by private individuals.

32. Obedience due only in so far as compatible with the word of God.

1. HAVING shown above that there is a twofold government in man, and having
fully considered the one which, placed in the soul or inward man, relates to
eternal life, we are here called to say something of the other, which pertains
only to civil institutions and the external regulation of manners. For although
this subject seems from its nature to be unconnected with the spiritual
doctrine of faith, which I have undertaken to treat, it will appear as we
proceed, that I have properly connected them, nay, that I am under the
necessity of doing so, especially while, on the one hand, frantic and barbarous
men are furiously endeavouring to overturn the order established by God, and,
on the other, the flatterers of princes, extolling their power without measure,
hesitate not to oppose it to the government of God. Unless we meet both
extremes, the purity of the faith will perish. We may add, that it in no small
degree concerns us to know how kindly God has here consulted for the human
race, that pious zeal may the more strongly urge us to testify our gratitude.
And first, before entering on the subject itself, it is necessary to attend to
the distinction which we formerly laid down (Book 3 Chap. 19 sec. 16, et supra,
Chap. 10), lest, as often happens to many, we imprudently confound these two
things, the nature of which is altogether different. For some, on hearing that
liberty is promised in the gospel, a liberty which acknowledges no king and no
magistrate among men, but looks to Christ alone, think that they can receive no
benefit from their liberty so long as they see any power placed over them.
Accordingly, they think that nothing will be safe until the whole world is
changed into a new form, when there will be neither courts, nor laws, nor
magistrates, nor anything of the kind to interfere, as they suppose, with their
liberty. But he who knows to distinguish between the body and the soul, between
the present fleeting life and that which is future and eternal, will have no
difficulty in understanding that the spiritual kingdom of Christ and civil
government are things very widely separated. Seeing, therefore, it is a Jewish
vanity to seek and include the kingdom of Christ under the elements of this
world, let us, considering, as Scripture clearly teaches, that the blessings
which we derive from Christ are spiritual, remember to confine the liberty
which is promised and offered to us in him within its proper limits. For why is
it that the very same apostle who bids us ìstand fast in the liberty
wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not again entangled with the yoke of
bondageî (Gal. 5:1), in another passage forbids slaves to be solicitous
about their state (1 Cor. 7:21), unless it be that spiritual liberty is
perfectly compatible with civil servitude? In this sense the following passages
are to be understood: ìThere is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
bond nor free, there is neither male nor femaleî (Gal. 3:28). Again,
ìThere is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision,
barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all and in allî (Col.
3:11). It is thus intimated, that it matters not what your condition is among
men, nor under what laws you live, since in them the kingdom of Christ does not
at all consist.

2. Still the distinction does not go so far as to justify us in supposing that
the whole scheme of civil government is matter of pollution, with which
Christian men have nothing to do. Fanatics, indeed, delighting in unbridled
license, insist and vociferate that, after we are dead by Christ to the
elements of this world, and being translated into the kingdom of God sit among
the celestials, it is unworthy of us, and far beneath our dignity, to be
occupied with those profane and impure cares which relate to matters alien from
a Christian man. To what end, they say, are laws without courts and tribunals?
But what has a Christian man to do with courts? Nay, if it is unlawful to kill,
what have we to do with laws and courts? But as we lately taught that that kind
of government is distinct from the spiritual and internal kingdom of Christ, so
we ought to know that they are not adverse to each other. The former, in some
measure, begins the heavenly kingdom in us, even now upon earth, and in this
mortal and evanescent life commences immortal and incorruptible blessedness,
while to the latter it is assigned, so long as we live among men, to foster and
maintain the external worship of God, to defend sound doctrine and the
condition of the Church, to adapt our conduct to human society, to form our
manners to civil justice, to conciliate us to each other, to cherish common
peace and tranquillity. All these I confess to be superfluous, if the kingdom
of God, as it now exists within us, extinguishes the present life. But if it is
the will of God that while we aspire to true piety we are pilgrims upon the
earth, and if such pilgrimage stands in need of such aids, those who take them
away from man rob him of his humanity. As to their allegation that there ought
to be such perfection in the Church of God that her guidance should suffice for
law, they stupidly imagine her to be such as she never can be found in the
community of men. For while the insolence of the wicked is so great, and their
iniquity so stubborn, that it can scarcely be curbed by any severity of laws,
what do we expect would be done by those whom force can scarcely repress from
doing ill, were they to see perfect impunity for their wickedness?

3. But we shall have a fitter opportunity of speaking of the use of civil
government. All we wish to be understood at present is, that it is perfect
barbarism to think of exterminating it, its use among men being not less than
that of bread and water, light and air, while its dignity is much more
excellent. Its object is not merely, like those things, to enable men to
breathe, eat, drink, and be warmed (though it certainly includes all these,
while it enables them to live together); this, I say, is not its only object,
but it is, that no idolatry, no blasphemy against the name of God, no calumnies
against his truth, nor other offences to religion, break out and be
disseminated among the people; that the public quiet be not disturbed, that
every manís property be kept secure, that men may carry on innocent
commerce with each other, that honesty and modesty be cultivated; in short,
that a public form of religion may exist among Christians, and humanity among
men. Let no one be surprised that I now attribute the task of constituting
religion aright to human polity, though I seem above to have placed it beyond
the will of man, since I no more than formerly allow men at pleasure to enact
laws concerning religion and the worship of God, when I approve of civil order
which is directed to this endóviz. to prevent the true religion, which
is contained in the law of God, from being with impunity openly violated and
polluted by public blasphemy. But the reader, by the help of a perspicuous
arrangement, will better understand what view is to be taken of the whole order
of civil government, if we treat of each of its parts separately. Now these are
three: The Magistrate, who is president and guardian of the laws; the Laws,
according to which he governs; and the People, who are governed by the laws,
and obey the magistrate. Let us consider, then, first, What is the function of
the magistrate? Is it a lawful calling approved by God? What is the nature of
his duty? What the extent of his power? Secondly, What are the laws by which
Christian polity is to be regulated? And, lastly, What is the use of laws as
regards the people? And, What obedience is due to the magistrate?

4. With regard to the function of magistrates, the Lord has not only declared
that he approves and is pleased with it, but, moreover, has strongly
recommended it to us by the very honourable titles which he has conferred upon
it. To mention a, few.64[9] When
those who bear the office of magistrate are called gods, let no one suppose
that there is little weight in that appellation. It is thereby intimated that
they have a commission from God, that they are invested with divine authority,
and, in fact, represent the person of God, as whose substitutes they in a
manner act. This is not a quibble of mine, but is the interpretation of Christ.
ìIf Scripture,î says he, ìcalled them Gods, to whom the
word of God came.î What is this but that the business was committed to
them by God, to serve him in their office, and (as Moses and Jehoshaphat said
to the judges whom they were appointing over each of the cities of Judah) to
exercise judgment, not for man, but for God? To the same effect Wisdom affirms,
by the mouth of Solomon, ìBy me kings reign, and princes decree justice.
By me princes rule, and nobles, even all the judges of the earthî (Prov.
8:15, 16). For it is just as if it had been said, that it is not owing to human
perverseness that supreme power on earth is lodged in kings and other
governors, but by Divine Providence, and the holy decree of Him to whom it has
seemed good so to govern the affairs of men, since he is present, and also
presides in enacting laws and exercising judicial equity. This Paul also
plainly teaches when he enumerates offices of rule among the gifts of God,
which, distributed variously, according to the measure of grace, ought to be
employed by the servants of Christ for the edification of the Church (Rom.
12:8). In that place, however, he is properly speaking of the senate of grave
men who were appointed in the primitive Church to take charge of public
discipline. This office, in the Epistle to the Corinthians, he calls
kubernhvsei", governments (1 Cor. 12:28). Still, as we see that civil
power has the same end in view, there can be no doubt that he is recommending
every kind of just government. He speaks much more clearly when he comes to a
proper discussion of the subject. For he says that ìthere is no power
but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God;î that rulers are the
ministers of God, ìnot a terror to good works, but to the evilî
(Rom. 13:1, 3). To this we may add the examples of saints, some of whom held
the offices of kings, as David, Josiah, and Hezekiah; others of governors, as
Joseph and Daniel; others of civil magistrates among a free people, as Moses,
Joshua, and the Judges. Their functions were expressly approved by the Lord.
Wherefore no man can doubt that civil authority is, in the sight of God, not
only sacred and lawful, but the most sacred, and by far the most honourable, of
all stations in mortal life.

5. Those who are desirous to introduce anarchy65[0] object that, though anciently kings and judges presided
over a rude people, yet that, in the present day, that servile mode of
governing does not at all accord with the perfection which Christ brought with
his gospel. Herein they betray not only their ignorance, but their devilish
pride, arrogating to themselves a perfection of which not even a hundredth part
is seen in them. But be they what they may, the refutation is easy. For when
David says, ìBe wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges
of the earth;î ìKiss the Son, lest he be angryî (Psalm 2:10,
12), he does not order them to lay aside their authority and return to private
life, but to make the power with which they are invested subject to Christ,
that he may rule over all. In like manner, when Isaiah predicts of the Church,
ìKings shall be thy nursing-fathers, and their queens thy
nursing-mothersî (Isaiah 49:23), he does not bid them abdicate their
authority; he rather gives them the honourable appellation of patrons of the
pious worshippers of God; for the prophecy refers to the advent of Christ. I
intentionally omit very many passages which occur throughout Scripture, and
especially in the Psalms, in which the due authority of all rulers is asserted.
The most celebrated passage of all is that in which Paul, admonishing Timothy,
that prayers are to be offered up in the public assembly for kings, subjoins
the reason, ìthat we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all
godliness and honestyî (1 Tim. 2:2). In these words, he recommends the
condition of the Church to their protection and guardianship.

6. This consideration ought to be constantly present to the minds of
magistrates, since it is fitted to furnish a strong stimulus to the discharge
of duty, and also afford singular consolation, smoothing the difficulties of
their office, which are certainly numerous and weighty. What zeal for
integrity, prudence, meekness, continence, and innocence, ought to sway those
who know that they have been appointed ministers of the divine justice! How
will they dare to admit iniquity to their tribunal, when they are told that it
is the throne of the living God? How will they venture to pronounce an unjust
sentence with that mouth which they understand to be an ordained organ of
divine truth? With what conscience will they subscribe impious decrees with
that hand which they know has been appointed to write the acts of God? In a
word, if they remember that they are the vicegerents of God, it behoves them to
watch with all care, diligence, and industry, that they may in themselves
exhibit a kind of image of the Divine Providence, guardianship, goodness,
benevolence, and justice. And let them constantly keep the additional thought
in view, that if a curse is pronounced on him that ìdoeth the work of
the Lord deceitfully,î a much heavier curse must lie on him who deals
deceitfully in a righteous calling. Therefore, when Moses and Jehoshaphat would
urge their judges to the discharge of duty, they had nothing by which they
could more powerfully stimulate their minds than the consideration to which we
have already referred,óìTake heed what ye do: for ye judge not
for man, but for the Lord, who is with you in the judgment. Wherefore now let
the fear of the Lord be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity
with the Lord our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of giftsî (2
Chron. 19:6, 7, compared with Deut. 1:16, &c.). And in another passage it
is said, ìGod standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth
among the godsî (Psalm 82:1; Isaiah 3:14), that they may be animated to
duty when they hear that they are the ambassadors of God, to whom they must one
day render an account of the province committed to them. This admonition ought
justly to have the greatest effect upon them; for if they sin in any respect,
not only is injury done to the men whom they wickedly torment, but they also
insult God himself, whose sacred tribunals they pollute. On the other hand,
they have an admirable source of comfort when they reflect that they are not
engaged in profane occupations, unbefitting a servant of God, but in a most
sacred office, inasmuch as they are the ambassadors of God.

7. In regard to those who are not debarred by all these passages of Scripture
from presuming to inveigh against this sacred ministry, as if it were a thing
abhorrent from religion and Christian piety, what else do they than assail God
himself, who cannot but be insulted when his servants are disgraced? These men
not only speak evil of dignities, but would not even have God to reign over
them (1 Sam. 7:7). For if this was truly said of the people of Israel, when
they declined the authority of Samuel, how can it be less truly said in the
present day of those who allow themselves to break loose against all the
authority established by God? But it seems that when our Lord said to his
disciples, ìThe kings of the gentiles exercise lordship over them; and
they that exercise authority upon them are called benefactors. But ye shall not
be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he
that is chief; as he that doth serveî (Luke 22:25, 26); he by these words
prohibited all Christians from becoming kings or governors. Dexterous
expounders! A dispute had arisen among the disciples as to which of them should
be greatest. To suppress this vain ambition, our Lord taught them that their
ministry was not like the power of earthly sovereigns, among whom one greatly
surpasses another. What, I ask, is there in this comparison disparaging to
royal dignity? nay, what does it prove at all unless that the royal office is
not the apostolic ministry? Besides, though among magisterial offices
themselves there are different forms, there is no difference in this respect,
that they are all to be received by us as ordinances of God. For Paul includes
all together when he says that ìthere is no power but of God,î and
that which was by no means the most pleasing of all, was honoured with the
highest testimonialóI mean the power of one. This, as carrying with it
the public servitude of all (except the one to whose despotic will all is
subject), was anciently disrelished by heroic and more excellent natures. But
Scripture, to obviate these unjust judgments, affirms expressly that it is by
divine wisdom that ìkings reign,î and gives special command
ìto honour the kingî (1 Peter 2:17).

8. And certainly it were a very idle occupation for private men to discuss
what would be the best form of polity in the place where they live, seeing
these deliberations cannot have any influence in determining any public matter.
Then the thing itself could not be defined absolutely without rashness, since
the nature of the discussion depends on circumstances. And if you compare the
different states with each other, without regard to circumstances, it is not
easy to determine which of these has the advantage in point of utility, so
equal are the terms on which they meet. Monarchy is prone to tyranny. In an
aristocracy, again, the tendency is not less to the faction of a few, while in
popular ascendancy there is the strongest tendency to sedition.65[1] When these three forms of government, of
which philosophers treat, are considered in themselves, I, for my part, am far
from denying that the form which greatly surpasses the others is aristocracy,
either pure or modified by popular government, not indeed in itself, but
because it very rarely happens that kings so rule themselves as never to
dissent from what is just and right, or are possessed of so much acuteness and
prudence as always to see correctly. Owing, therefore, to the vices or defects
of men, it is safer and more tolerable when several bear rule, that they may
thus mutually assist, instruct, and admonish each other, and should any one be
disposed to go too far, the others are censors and masters to curb his excess.
This has already been proved by experience, and confirmed also by the authority
of the Lord himself, when he established an aristocracy bordering on popular
government among the Israelites, keeping them under that as the best form,
until he exhibited an image of the Messiah in David. And as I willingly admit
that there is no kind of government happier than where liberty is framed with
becoming moderation, and duly constituted so as to be durable, so I deem those
very happy who are permitted to enjoy that form, and I admit that they do
nothing at variance with their duty when they strenuously and constantly labour
to preserve and maintain it. Nay, even magistrates ought to do their utmost to
prevent the liberty, of which they have been appointed guardians, from being
impaired, far less violated. If in this they are sluggish or little careful,
they are perfidious traitors to their office and their country. But should
those to whom the Lord has assigned one form of government, take it upon them
anxiously to long for a change, the wish would not only be foolish and
superfluous, but very pernicious. If you fix your eyes not on one state merely,
but look around the world, or at least direct your view to regions widely
separated from each other, you will perceive that Divine Providence has not,
without good cause, arranged that different countries should be governed by
different forms of polity. For as only elements of unequal temperature adhere
together, so in different regions a similar inequality in the form of
government is best. All this, however, is said unnecessarily to those to whom
the will of God is a sufficient reason. For if it has pleased him to appoint
kings over kingdoms, and senates or burgomasters over free states, whatever be
the form which he has appointed in the places in which we live, our duty is to
obey and submit.

9. The duty of magistrates, its nature, as described by the word of God, and
the things in which it consists, I will here indicate in passing. That it
extends to both tables of the law, did Scripture not teach, we might learn from
profane writers; for no man has discoursed of the duty of magistrates, the
enacting of laws, and the common weal, without beginning with religion and
divine worship. Thus all have confessed that no polity can be successfully
established unless piety be its first care, and that those laws are absurd
which disregard the rights of God, and consult only for men. Seeing then that
among philosophers religion holds the first place, and that the same thing has
always been observed with the universal consent of nations, Christian princes
and magistrates may be ashamed of their heartlessness if they make it not their
care. We have already shown that this office is specially assigned them by God,
and indeed it is right that they exert themselves in asserting and defending
the honour of him whose vicegerents they are, and by whose favour they rule.
Hence in Scripture holy kings are especially praised for restoring the worship
of God when corrupted or overthrown, or for taking care that religion
flourished under them in purity and safety. On the other hand, the sacred
history sets down anarchy among the vices, when it states that there was no
king in Israel, and, therefore, every one did as he pleased (Judges 21:25).
This rebukes the folly of those who would neglect the care of divine things,
and devote themselves merely to the administration of justice among men; as if
God had appointed rulers in his own name to decide earthly controversies, and
omitted what was of far greater moment, his own pure worship as prescribed by
his law. Such views are adopted by turbulent men, who, in their eagerness to
make all kinds of innovations with impunity, would fain get rid of all the
vindicators of violated piety. In regard to the second table of the law,
Jeremiah addresses rulers, ìThus saith the Lord, Execute ye judgment and
righteousness, and deliver the spoiled out of the hand of the oppressor: and do
no wrong, do no violence to the stranger, the fatherless, nor the widow,
neither shed innocent bloodî (Jer. 22:3). To the same effect is the
exhortation in the Psalm, ìDefend the poor and fatherless; do justice to
the afflicted and needy. Deliver the poor and needy; rid them out of the hand
of the wickedî (Psalm 82:3, 4). Moses also declared to the princes whom
he had substituted for himself, ìHear the causes between your brethren,
and judge righteously between every man and his brother, and the stranger that
is with him. Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the
small as well as the great: ye shall not be afraid of the face of man, for the
judgment is Godísî (Deut. 1:16). I say nothing as to such passages
as these, ìHe shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people
to return to Egypt;î ìneither shall he multiply wives to himself;
neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold;î ìhe
shall write him a copy of this law in a book;î ìand it shall be
with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life, that he may learn
to fear the Lord his God;î ìthat his heart be not lifted up above
his brethrenî (Deut. 17:16ñ20). In here explaining the duties of
magistrates, my exposition is intended not so much for the instruction of
magistrates themselves, as to teach others why there are magistrates, and to
what end they have been appointed by God. We say, therefore, that they are the
ordained guardians and vindicators of public innocence, modesty, honour, and
tranquillity, so that it should be their only study to provide for the common
peace and safety. Of these things David declares that he will set an example
when he shall have ascended the throne. ìA froward heart shall depart
from me: I will not know a wicked person. Whoso privily slandereth his
neighbour, him will I cut off: him that hath an high look and a proud heart
will not I suffer. Mine eyes shall be upon the faithful of the land, that they
may dwell with me: he that walketh in a perfect way, he shall serve meî
(Psalm 101:4ñ6). But as rulers cannot do this unless they protect the
good against the injuries of the bad, and give aid and protection to the
oppressed, they are armed with power to curb manifest evil-doers and criminals,
by whose misconduct the public tranquillity is disturbed or harassed. For we
have full experience of the truth of Solonís saying, that all public
matters depend on reward and punishment; that where these are wanting, the
whole discipline of states totters and falls to pieces. For in the minds of
many the love of equity and justice grows cold, if due honour be not paid to
virtue, and the licentiousness of the wicked cannot be restrained, without
strict discipline and the infliction of punishment. The two things are
comprehended by the prophet when he enjoins kings and other rulers to execute
ìjudgment and righteousnessî (Jer. 21:12; 22:3). It is
righteousness (justice) to take charge of the innocent, to defend and avenge
them, and set them free: it is judgment to withstand the audacity of the
wicked, to repress their violence, and punish their faults.

10. But here a difficult, and, as it seems, a perplexing question arises. If
all Christians are forbidden to kill, and the prophet predicts concerning the
holy mountain of the Lord, that is, the Church,65[2] ìThey shall not hurt or destroy,î how can
magistrates be at once pious and yet shedders of blood? But if we understand
that the magistrate, in inflicting punishment, acts not of himself, but
executes the very judgments of God, we shall be disencumbered of every doubt.
The law of the Lord forbids to kill; but, that murder may not go unpunished,
the Lawgiver himself puts the sword into the hands of his ministers, that they
may employ it against all murderers. It belongs not to the pious to afflict and
hurt; but to avenge the afflictions of the pious, at the command of God, is
neither to afflict nor hurt.65[3]
I wish it could always be present to our mind, that nothing is done here by the
rashness of man, but all in obedience to the authority of God. When it is the
guide, we never stray from the right path, unless, indeed, divine justice is to
be placed under restraint, and not allowed to take punishment on crimes. But if
we dare not give the law to it, why should we bring a charge against its
ministers? ìHe beareth not the sword in vain,î says Paul,
ìfor he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath on him that
doeth evilî (Rom. 13:4). Wherefore, if princes and other rulers know that
nothing will be more acceptable to God than their obedience, let them give
themselves to this service if they are desirous to improve their piety,
justice, and integrity to God. This was the feeling of Moses65[4] when, recognising himself as destined to
deliver his people by the power of the Lord, he laid violent hands on the
Egyptian, and afterwards took vengeance on the people for sacrilege, by slaying
three thousand of them in one day. This was the feeling of David also, when,
towards the end of his life, he ordered his son Solomon to put Joab and Shimei
to death. Hence, also, in an enumeration of the virtues of a king, one is to
cut off the wicked from the earth, and banish all workers of iniquity from the
city of God. To the same effect is the praise which is bestowed on Solomon,
ìThou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness.î How is it that
the meek and gentle temper of Moses becomes so exasperated, that, besmeared and
reeking with the blood of his brethren, he runs through the camp making new
slaughter? How is it that David, who, during his whole life, showed so much
mildness, almost at his last breath, leaves with his son the bloody testament,
not to allow the grey hairs of Joab and Shimei to go to the grave in peace?
Both, by their sternness, sanctified the hands which they would have polluted
by showing mercy, inasmuch as they executed the vengeance committed to them by
God. Solomon says,65[5]
ìIt is an abomination to kings to commit wickedness; for the throne is
established by righteousness.î Again, ìA king that sitteth in the
throne of judgment, scattereth away all evil with his eyes.î Again,
ìA wise king scattereth the wicked, and bringeth the wheel over
them.î Again, ìTake away the dross from the silver, and there
shall come forth a vessel for the finer. Take away the wicked men from before
the king, and his throne shall be established in righteousness.î Again,
ìHe that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even
they both are an abomination to the Lord.î Again, ìAn evil man
seeketh only rebellion, therefore an evil messenger shall be sent against
him.î Again, ìHe that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous;
him shall the people curse, nations shall abhor him.î Now, if it is true
justice in them to pursue the guilty and impious with drawn sword, to sheath
the sword, and keep their hands pure from blood, while nefarious men wade
through murder and slaughter, so far from redounding to the praise of their
goodness and justice, would be to incur the guilt of the greatest impiety;
provided always they eschew reckless and cruel asperity, and that tribunal
which may be justly termed a rock on which the accused must founder. For I am
not one of those who would either favour an unseasonable severity, or think
that any tribunal could be accounted just that is not presided over by mercy,
that best and surest counsellor of kings, and, as Solomon declares,
ìupholder of the throneî (Prov. 20:28). This, as was truly said by
one of old, should be the primary endowment of princes. The magistrate must
guard against both extremes; he must neither, by excessive severity, rather
wound than cure, nor by a superstitious affectation of clemency, fall into the
most cruel inhumanity, by giving way to soft and dissolute indulgence to the
destruction of many. It was well said by one under the empire of Nerva, It is
indeed a bad thing to live under a prince with whom nothing is lawful, but a
much worse to live under one with whom all things are lawful.

11. As it is sometimes necessary for kings and states to take up arms in order
to execute public vengeance, the reason assigned furnishes us with the means of
estimating how far the wars which are thus undertaken are lawful. For if power
has been given them to maintain the tranquillity of their subjects, repress the
seditious movements of the turbulent, assist those who are violently oppressed,
and animadvert on crimes, can they use it more opportunely than in repressing
the fury of him who disturbs both the ease of individuals and the common
tranquillity of all; who excites seditious tumult, and perpetrates acts of
violent oppression and gross wrongs? If it becomes them to be the guardians and
maintainers of the laws, they must repress the attempts of all alike by whose
criminal conduct the discipline of the laws is impaired. Nay, if they justly
punish those robbers whose injuries have been afflicted only on a few, will
they allow the whole country to be robbed and devastated with impunity? Since
it makes no difference whether it is by a king or by the lowest of the people
that a hostile and devastating inroad is made into a district over which they
have no authority, all alike are to be regarded and punished as robbers.
Natural equity and duty, therefore, demand that princes be armed not only to
repress private crimes by judicial inflictions, but to defend the subjects
committed to their guardianship whenever they are hostilely assailed. Such even
the Holy Spirit, in many passages of Scripture, declares to be lawful.

12. But if it is objected, that in the New Testament there is no passage or
example teaching that war is lawful for Christians, I answer, first, that the
reason for carrying on war, which anciently existed, still exists in the
present day, and that, on the other hand, there is no ground for debarring
magistrates from the defence of those under them; and, secondly, that in the
Apostolical writings we are not to look for a distinct exposition of those
matters, their object being not to form a civil polity, but to establish the
spiritual kingdom of Christ; lastly, that there also it is indicated, in
passing, that our Saviour, by his advent, made no change in this respect. For
(to use the words of Augustine) ìif Christian discipline condemned all
wars, when the soldiers ask counsel as to the way of salvation, they would have
been told to cast away their arms, and withdraw altogether from military
service. Whereas it was said (Luke 3:14), Concuss no one, do injury to no one,
be contented with your pay. Those whom he orders to be contented with their pay
he certainly does not forbid to serveî (August. Ep. 5 ad Marcell.) But
all magistrates must here be particularly cautious not to give way, in the
slightest degree, to their passions. Or rather, whether punishments are to be
inflicted, they must not be borne headlong by anger, nor hurried away by
hatred, nor burn with implacable severity; they must, as Augustine says (De
Civit. Dei. Lib. 5 cap. 24), ìeven pity a common nature in him in whom
they punish an individual fault;î or whether they have to take up arms
against an enemy, that is, an armed robber, they must not readily catch at the
opportunity, nay, they must not take it when offered, unless compelled by the
strongest necessity. For if we are to do far more than that heathen demanded,
who wished war to appear as desired peace, assuredly all other means must be
tried before having recourse to arms. In fine, in both cases, they must not
allow themselves to be carried away by any private feeling, but be guided
solely by regard for the public. Acting otherwise, they wickedly abuse their
power which was given them, not for their own advantage, but for the good and
service of others. On this right of war depends the right of garrisons,
leagues, and other civil munitions. By garrisons, I mean those which are
stationed in states for defence of the frontiers; by leagues, the alliances
which are made by neighbouring princes, on the ground that if any disturbance
arise within their territories, they will mutually assist each other, and
combine their forces to repel the common enemies of the human race; under civil
munitions, I include everything pertaining to the military art.

13. Lastly, we think it proper to add, that taxes and imposts are the
legitimate revenues of princes, which they are chiefly to employ in sustaining
the public burdens of their office. These, however, they may use for the
maintenance of their domestic state, which is in a manner combined with the
dignity of the authority which they exercise. Thus we see that David, Hezekiah,
Josiah, Jehoshaphat, and other holy kings, Joseph also, and Daniel, in
proportion to the office which they sustained, without offending piety,
expended liberally of the public funds; and we read in Ezekiel, that a very
large extent of territory was assigned to kings (Ezek. 48:21). In that passage,
indeed, he is depicting the spiritual kingdom of Christ, but still he borrows
his representation from lawful dominion among men. Princes, however, must
remember, in their turn, that their revenues are not so much private chests as
treasuries of the whole people (this Paul testifies, Rom. 13:6), which they
cannot, without manifest injustice, squander or dilapidate; or rather, that
they are almost the blood of the people, which it were the harshest inhumanity
not to spare. They should also consider that their levies and contributions,
and other kinds of taxes, are merely subsidies of the public necessity, and
that it is tyrannical rapacity to harass the poor people with them without
cause. These things do not stimulate princes to profusion and luxurious
expenditure (there is certainly no need to inflame the passions, when they are
already, of their own accord, inflamed more than enough), but seeing it is of
the greatest consequence that, whatever they venture to do, they should do with
a pure conscience, it is necessary to teach them how far they can lawfully go,
lest, by impious confidence, they incur the divine displeasure. Nor is this
doctrine superfluous to private individuals, that they may not rashly and
petulantly stigmatise the expenditure of princes, though it should exceed the
ordinary limits.

14. In states, the thing next in importance to the magistrates is laws, the
strongest sinews of government, or, as Cicero calls them after Plato, the soul,
without which, the office of the magistrate cannot exist; just as, on the other
hand, laws have no vigour without the magistrate. Hence nothing could be said
more truly than that the law is a dumb magistrate, the magistrate a living law.
As I have undertaken to describe the laws by which Christian polity is to be
governed, there is no reason to expect from me a long discussion on the best
kind of laws. The subject is of vast extent, and belongs not to this place. I
will only briefly observe, in passing, what the laws are which may be piously
used with reference to God, and duly administered among men. This I would
rather have passed in silence, were I not aware that many dangerous errors are
here committed. For there are some who deny that any commonwealth is rightly
framed which neglects the law of Moses, and is ruled by the common law of
nations. How perilous and seditious these views are, let others see: for me it
is enough to demonstrate that they are stupid and false. We must attend to the
well known division which distributes the whole law of God, as promulgated by
Moses, into the moral, the ceremonial, and the judicial law, and we must attend
to each of these parts, in order to understand how far they do, or do not,
pertain to us. Meanwhile, let no one be moved by the thought that the judicial
and ceremonial laws relate to morals. For the ancients who adopted this
division, though they were not unaware that the two latter classes had to do
with morals, did not give them the name of moral, because they might be changed
and abrogated without affecting morals. They give this name specially to the
first class, without which, true holiness of life and an immutable rule of
conduct cannot exist.

15. The moral law, then (to begin with it), being contained under two heads,
the one of which simply enjoins us to worship God with pure faith and piety,
the other to embrace men with sincere affection, is the true and eternal rule
of righteousness prescribed to the men of all nations and of all times, who
would frame their life agreeably to the will of God. For his eternal and
immutable will is, that we are all to worship him and mutually love one
another. The ceremonial law of the Jews was a tutelage by which the Lord was
pleased to exercise, as it were, the childhood of that people, until the
fulness of the time should come when he was fully to manifest his wisdom to the
world, and exhibit the reality of those things which were then adumbrated by
figures (Gal. 3:24; 4:4). The judicial law, given them as a kind of polity,
delivered certain forms of equity and justice, by which they might live
together innocently and quietly. And as that exercise in ceremonies properly
pertained to the doctrine of piety, inasmuch as it kept the Jewish Church in
the worship and religion of God, yet was still distinguishable from piety
itself, so the judicial form, though it looked only to the best method of
preserving that charity which is enjoined by the eternal law of God, was still
something distinct from the precept of love itself. Therefore, as ceremonies
might be abrogated without at all interfering with piety, so, also, when these
judicial arrangements are removed, the duties and precepts of charity can still
remain perpetual. But if it is true that each nation has been left at liberty
to enact the laws which it judges to be beneficial, still these are always to
be tested by the rule of charity, so that while they vary in form, they must
proceed on the same principle. Those barbarous and savage laws, for instance,
which conferred honour on thieves, allowed the promiscuous intercourse of the
sexes, and other things even fouler and more absurd, I do not think entitled to
be considered as laws, since they are not only altogether abhorrent to justice,
but to humanity and civilised life.

16. What I have said will become plain if we attend, as we ought, to two things
connected with all lawsóviz. the enactment of the law, and the equity on
which the enactment is founded and rests. Equity, as it is natural, cannot be
the same in all, and therefore ought to be proposed by all laws, according to
the nature of the thing enacted. As constitutions have some circumstances on
which they partly depend, there is nothing to prevent their diversity, provided
they all alike aim at equity as their end. Now, as it is evident that the law
of God which we call moral, is nothing else than the testimony of natural law,
and of that conscience which God has engraven on the minds of men, the whole of
this equity of which we now speak is prescribed in it. Hence it alone ought to
be the aim, the rule, and the end of all laws. Wherever laws are formed after
this rule, directed to this aim, and restricted to this end, there is no reason
why they should be disapproved by us, however much they may differ from the
Jewish law, or from each other (August. de Civit. Dei, Lib. 19 c. 17). The law
of God forbids to steal. The punishment appointed for theft in the civil polity
of the Jews may be seen in Exodus 22. Very ancient laws of other nations
punished theft by exacting the double of what was stolen, while subsequent laws
made a distinction between theft manifest and not manifest. Other laws went the
length of punishing with exile, or with branding, while others made the
punishment capital. Among the Jews, the punishment of the false witness was to
ìdo unto him as he had thought to have done with his brotherî
(Deut. 19:19). In some countries, the punishment is infamy, in others hanging,
in others crucifixion. All laws alike avenge murder with blood, but the kinds
of death are different. In some countries, adultery was punished more severely,
in others more leniently. Yet we see that amidst this diversity they all tend
to the same end. For they all with one mouth declare against those crimes which
are condemned by the eternal law of Godóviz. murder, theft, adultery,
and false witness; though they agree not as to the mode of punishment. This is
not necessary, nor even expedient. There may be a country which, if murder were
not visited with fearful punishments, would instantly become a prey to robbery
and slaughter. There may be an age requiring that the severity of punishments
should be increased. If the state is in troubled condition, those things from
which disturbances usually arise must be corrected by new edicts. In time of
war, civilisation would disappear amid the noise of arms, were not men overawed
by an unwonted severity of punishment. In sterility, in pestilence, were not
stricter discipline employed, all things would grow worse. One nation might be
more prone to a particular vice, were it not most severely repressed. How
malignant were it, and invidious of the public good, to be offended at this
diversity, which is admirably adapted to retain the observance of the divine
law. The allegation, that insult is offered to the law of God enacted by Moses,
where it is abrogated, and other new laws are preferred to it, is most absurd.
Others are not preferred when they are more approved, not absolutely, but from
regard to time and place, and the condition of the people, or when those things
are abrogated which were never enacted for us. The Lord did not deliver it by
the hand of Moses to be promulgated in all countries, and to be everywhere
enforced; but having taken the Jewish nation under his special care, patronage,
and guardianship, he was pleased to be specially its legislator, and as became
a wise legislator, he had special regard to it in enacting laws.

17. It now remains to see, as was proposed in the last place, what use the
common society of Christians derive from laws, judicial proceedings, and
magistrates. With this is connected another question óviz. What
difference ought private individuals to pay to magistrates, and how far ought
obedience to proceed? To very many it seems that among Christians the office of
magistrate is superfluous, because they cannot piously implore his aid,
inasmuch as they are forbidden to take revenge, cite before a judge, or go to
law. But when Paul, on the contrary, clearly declares that he is the minister
of God to us for good (Rom. 13:4), we thereby understand that he was so
ordained of God, that, being defended by his hand and aid against the
dishonesty and injustice of wicked men, we may live quiet and secure. But if he
would have been appointed over us in vain, unless we were to use his aid, it is
plain that it cannot be wrong to appeal to it and implore it. Here, indeed, I
have to do with two classes of men. For there are very many who boil with such
a rage for litigation, that they never can be quiet with themselves unless they
are fighting with others. Law-suits they prosecute with the bitterness of
deadly hatred, and with an insane eagerness to hurt and revenge, and they
persist in them with implacable obstinacy, even to the ruin of their adversary.
Meanwhile, that they may be thought to do nothing but what is legal, they use
this pretext of judicial proceedings as a defence of their perverse conduct.
But if it is lawful for brother to litigate with brother, it does not follow
that it is lawful to hate him, and obstinately pursue him with a furious desire
to do him harm.

18. Let such persons then understand that judicial proceedings are lawful to
him who makes a right use of them; and the right use, both for the pursuer and
for the defender, is for the latter to sist himself on the day appointed, and,
without bitterness, urge what he can in his defence, but only with the desire
of justly maintaining his right; and for the pursuer, when undeservedly
attacked in his life or fortunes, to throw himself upon the protection of the
magistrate, state his complaint, and demand what is just and good; while, far
from any wish to hurt or take vengeanceófar from bitterness or hatred
ófar from the ardour of strife, he is rather disposed to yield and
suffer somewhat than to cherish hostile feelings towards his opponent. On the
contrary, when minds are filled with malevolence, corrupted by envy, burning
with anger, breathing revenge, or, in fine, so inflamed by the heat of the
contest, that they, in some measure, lay aside charity, the whole pleading,
even of the justest cause, cannot but be impious. For it ought to be an axiom
among all Christians, that no plea, however equitable, can be rightly conducted
by any one who does not feel as kindly towards his opponent as if the matter in
dispute were amicably transacted and arranged. Some one, perhaps, may here
break in and say, that such moderation in judicial proceedings is so far from
being seen, that an instance of it would be a kind of prodigy. I confess that
in these times it is rare to meet with an example of an honest litigant; but
the thing itself, untainted by the accession of evil, ceases not to be good and
pure. When we hear that the assistance of the magistrate is a sacred gift from
God, we ought the more carefully to beware of polluting it by our fault.

19. Let those who distinctly condemn all judicial distinction know, that they
repudiate the holy ordinance of God, and one of those gifts which to the pure
are pure, unless, indeed, they would charge Paul with a crime,65[6] because he repelled the calumnies of his
accusers, exposing their craft and wickedness, and, at the tribunal, claimed
for himself the privilege of a Roman citizen, appealing, when necessary, from
the governor to CÊsarís judgment-seat. There is nothing contrary
to this in the prohibition, which binds all Christians to refrain from revenge,
a feeling which we drive far away from all Christian tribunals. For whether the
action be of a civil nature, he only takes the right course who, with innocuous
simplicity, commits his cause to the judge as the public protector, without any
thought of returning evil for evil (which is the feeling of revenge); or
whether the action is of a graver nature, directed against a capital offence,
the accuser required is not one who comes into court, carried away by some
feeling of revenge or resentment from some private injury, but one whose only
object is to prevent the attempts of some bad men to injure the commonweal. But
if you take away the vindictive mind, you offend in no respect against that
command which forbids Christians to indulge revenge. But they are not only
forbidden to thirst for revenge, they are also enjoined to wait for the hand of
the Lord, who promises that he will be the avenger of the oppressed and
afflicted. But those who call upon the magistrate to give assistance to
themselves or others, anticipate the vengeance of the heavenly Judge. By no
means, for we are to consider that the vengeance of the magistrate is the
vengeance not of man, but of God, which, as Paul says, he exercises by the
ministry of man for our good (Rom. 13:8).

20. No more are we at variance with the words of Christ, who forbids us to
resist evil, and adds, ìWhosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek,
turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take
away thy coat, let him have thy cloak alsoî (Mt. 5:39, 40). He would have
the minds of his followers to be so abhorrent to everything like retaliation,
that they would sooner allow the injury to be doubled than desire to repay it.
From this patience we do not dissuade them. For verily Christians were to be a
class of men born to endure affronts and injuries, and be exposed to the
iniquity, imposture, and derision of abandoned men, and not only so, but were
to be tolerant of all these evils; that is, so composed in the whole frame of
their minds, that, on receiving one offence, they were to prepare themselves
for another, promising themselves nothing during the whole of life but the
endurance of a perpetual cross. Meanwhile, they must do good to those who
injure them, and pray for those who curse them, and (this is their only
victory) strive to overcome evil with good (Rom. 12:20, 21). Thus affected,
they will not seek eye for eye, and tooth for tooth (as the Pharisees taught
their disciples to long for vengeance), but (as we are instructed by Christ),
they will allow their body to be mutilated, and their goods to be maliciously
taken from them, prepared to remit and spontaneously pardon those injuries the
moment they have been inflicted. This equity and moderation, however, will not
prevent them, with entire friendship for their enemies, from using the aid of
the magistrate for the preservation of their goods, or, from zeal for the
public interest, to call for the punishment of the wicked and pestilential man,
whom they know nothing will reform but death. All these precepts are truly
expounded by Augustine, as tending to prepare the just and pious man patiently
to sustain the malice of those whom he desires to become good, that he may thus
increase the number of the good, not add himself to the number of the bad by
imitating their wickedness. Moreover, it pertains more to the preparation of
the heart which is within, than to the work which is done openly, that patience
and good-will may be retained within the secret of the heart, and that may be
done openly which we see may do good to those to whom we ought to wish well
(August. Ep. 5 ad. Marcell.).

21. The usual objection, that law-suits are universally condemned by Paul (1
Cor. 6:6), is false. It may easily be understood from his words, that a rage
for litigation prevailed in the Church of Corinth to such a degree, that they
exposed the gospel of Christ, and the whole religion which they professed, to
the calumnies and cavils of the ungodly. Paul rebukes them, first for traducing
the gospel to unbelievers by the intemperance of their dissensions; and,
secondly, for so striving with each other while they were brethren. For so far
were they from bearing injury from another, that they greedily coveted each
otherís effects, and voluntarily provoked and injured them. He inveighs,
therefore, against that madness for litigation, and not absolutely against all
kinds of disputes. He declares it to be altogether a vice or infirmity, that
they do not submit to the loss of their effects, rather than strive, even to
contention, in preserving them; in other words, seeing they were so easily
moved by every kind of loss, and on every occasion, however slight, ran off to
the forum and to law-suits, he says, that in this way they showed that they
were of too irritable a temper, and not prepared for patience. Christians
should always feel disposed rather to give up part of their right than to go
into court, out of which they can scarcely come without a troubled mind, a mind
inflamed with hatred of their brother. But when one sees that his property, the
want of which he would grievously feel, he is able, without any loss of
charity, to defend, if he should do so, he offends in no respect against that
passage of Paul. In short, as we said at first, every manís best adviser
is charity. Everything in which we engage without charity, and all the disputes
which carry us beyond it, are unquestionably unjust and impious.

22. The first duty of subjects towards their rulers, is to entertain the most
honourable views of their office, recognising it as a delegated jurisdiction
from God, and on that account receiving and reverencing them as the ministers
and ambassadors of God. For you will find some who show themselves very
obedient to magistrates, and would be unwilling that there should be no
magistrates to obey, because they know this is expedient for the public good,
and yet the opinion which those persons have of magistrates is, that they are a
kind of necessary evils. But Peter requires something more of us when he says,
ìHonour the kingî (1 Pet. 2:17); and Solomon, when he says,
ìMy son, fear thou the Lord and the kingî (Prov. 24:21). For,
under the term honour, the former includes a sincere and candid esteem, and the
latter, by joining the king with God, shows that he is invested with a kind of
sacred veneration and dignity. We have also the remarkable injunction of Paul,
ìBe subject not only for wrath, but also for conscience sakeî
(Rom. 13:5). By this he means, that subjects, in submitting to princes and
governors, are not to be influenced merely by fear (just as those submit to an
armed enemy who see vengeance ready to be executed if they resist), but because
the obedience which they yield is rendered to God himself, inasmuch as their
power is from God. I speak not of the men as if the mask of dignity could cloak
folly, or cowardice, or cruelty, or wicked or flagitious manners, and thus
acquire for vice the praise of virtue; but I say that the station itself is
deserving of honour and reverence, and that those who rule should, in respect
of their office, be held by us in esteem and veneration.

23. From this, a second consequence is, that we must with ready minds prove our
obedience to them, whether in complying with edicts, or in paying tribute, or
in undertaking public offices and burdens, which relate to the common defence,
or in executing any other orders. ìLet every soul,î says Paul,
ìbe subject unto the higher powers.î ìWhosoever, therefore,
resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of Godî (Rom. 13:1, 2).
Writing to Titus, he says, ìPut them in mind to be subject to
principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good
workî (Tit. 3:1). Peter also says, ìSubmit yourselves to every
human creatureî (or rather, as I understand it, ìordinance of
manî), ìfor the Lordís sake: whether it be to the king, as
supreme; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the
punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them that do wellî (1
Pet. 2:13). Moreover, to testify that they do not feign subjection, but are
sincerely and cordially subject, Paul adds, that they are to commend the safety
and prosperity of those under whom they live to God. ìI exhort,
therefore,î says he, ìthat, first of all, supplications, prayers,
intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; for kings, and for
all that are in authority: that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all
godliness and honestyî (1 Tim. 2:1, 2). Let no man here deceive himself,
since we cannot resist the magistrate without resisting God. For, although an
unarmed magistrate may seem to be despised with impunity, yet God is armed, and
will signally avenge this contempt. Under this obedience, I comprehend the
restraint which private men ought to impose on themselves in public, not
interfering with public business, or rashly encroaching on the province of the
magistrate, or attempting anything at all of a public nature. If it is proper
that anything in a public ordinance should be corrected, let them not act
tumultuously, or put their hands to a work where they ought to feel that their
hands are tied, but let them leave it to the cognisance of the magistrate,
whose hand alone here is free. My meaning is, let them not dare to do it
without being ordered. For when the command of the magistrate is given, they
too are invested with public authority. For as, according to the common saying,
the eyes and ears of the prince are his counsellors, so one may not improperly
say that those who, by his command, have the charge of managing affairs, are
his hands.

24. But as we have hitherto described the magistrate who truly is what he is
calledóviz. the father of his country, and (as the Poet speaks) the
pastor of the people, the guardian of peace, the president of justice, the
vindicator of innocence, he is justly to be deemed a madman who disapproves of
such authority. And since in almost all ages we see that some princes, careless
about all their duties on which they ought to have been intent, live, without
solicitude, in luxurious sloth; others, bent on their own interest, venally
prostitute all rights, privileges, judgments, and enactments; others pillage
poor people of their money, and afterwards squander it in insane largesses;
others act as mere robbers, pillaging houses, violating matrons, and slaying
the innocent; many cannot be persuaded to recognise such persons for princes,
whose command, as far as lawful, they are bound to obey. For while in this
unworthy conduct, and among atrocities so alien, not only from the duty of the
magistrate, but also of the man, they behold no appearance of the image of God,
which ought to be conspicuous in the magistrate, while they see not a vestige
of that minister of God, who was appointed to be a praise to the good and a
terror to the bad, they cannot recognise the ruler whose dignity and authority
Scripture recommends to us. And, undoubtedly, the natural feeling of the human
mind has always been not less to assail tyrants with hatred and execration,
than to look up to just kings with love and veneration.

25. But if we have respect to the word of God, it will lead us farther, and
make us subject not only to the authority of those princes who honestly and
faithfully perform their duty toward us, but all princes, by whatever means
they have so become, although there is nothing they less perform than the duty
of princes. For though the Lord declares that a ruler to maintain our safety is
the highest gift of his beneficence, and prescribes to rulers themselves their
proper sphere, he at the same time declares, that of whatever description they
may be, they derive their power from none but him. Those, indeed, who rule for
the public good, are true examples and specimens of his beneficence, while
those who domineer unjustly and tyrannically are raised up by him to punish the
people for their iniquity. Still all alike possess that sacred majesty with
which he has invested lawful power. I will not proceed further without
subjoining some distinct passages to this effect.65[7] We need not labour to prove that an impious king is a
mark of the Lordís anger, since I presume no one will deny it, and that
this is not less true of a king than of a robber who plunders your goods, an
adulterer who defiles your bed, and an assassin who aims at your life, since
all such calamities are classed by Scripture among the curses of God. But let
us insist at greater length in proving what does not so easily fall in with the
views of men, that even an individual of the worst character, one most unworthy
of all honour, if invested with public authority, receives that illustrious
divine power which the Lord has by his word devolved on the ministers of his
justice and judgment, and that, accordingly, in so far as public obedience is
concerned, he is to be held in the same honour and reverence as the best of
kings.

26. And, first, I would have the reader carefully to attend to that Divine
Providence which, not without cause, is so often set before us in Scripture,
and that special act of distributing kingdoms, and setting up as kings
whomsoever he pleases. In Daniel it is said, ìHe changeth the times and
the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kingsî (Dan. 2:21, 37).
Again, ìThat the living may know that the Most High ruleth in the
kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he willî (Dan. 4:17, 25).
Similar sentiments occur throughout Scripture, but they abound particularly in
the prophetical books. What kind of king Nebuchadnezzar, he who stormed
Jerusalem, was, is well known. He was an active invader and devastator of other
countries. Yet the Lord declares in Ezekiel that he had given him the land of
Egypt as his hire for the devastation which he had committed. Daniel also said
to him, ìThou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath
given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory. And wheresoever the
children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath
he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them allî (Dan.
2:37, 38). Again, he says to his son Belshazzar, ìThe most high God gave
Nebuchadnezzar thy father a kingdom, and majesty, and glory, and honour: and
for the majesty that he gave him, all people, nations, and languages, trembled
and feared before himî (Dan. 5:18, 19). When we hear that the king was
appointed by God, let us, at the same time, call to mind those heavenly edicts
as to honouring and fearing the king, and we shall have no doubt that we are to
view the most iniquitous tyrant as occupying the place with which the Lord has
honoured him. When Samuel declared to the people of Israel what they would
suffer from their kings, he said, ìThis will be the manner of the king
that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for
himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before
his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains
over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and
to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will
take your daughters to be confectioneries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.
And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the
best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your
seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And
he will take your men-servants, and your maid-servants, and your goodliest
young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of
your sheep: and ye shall be his servantsî (1 Sam. 8:11ñl7).
Certainly these things could not be done legally by kings, whom the law trained
most admirably to all kinds of restraint; but it was called justice in regard
to the people, because they were bound to obey, and could not lawfully resist:
as if Samuel had said, To such a degree will kings indulge in tyranny, which it
will not be for you to restrain. The only thing remaining for you will be to
receive their commands, and be obedient to their words.

27. But the most remarkable and memorable passage is in Jeremiah. Though it is
rather long, I am not indisposed to quote it, because it most clearly settles
this whole question. ìI have made the earth, the man and the beast that
are upon the ground, by my great power, and by my outstretched arm, and have
given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me. And now have I given all these lands
into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, my servant: and the beasts
of the field have I given him also to serve him. And all nations shall serve
him, and his son, and his sonís son, until the very time of his land
come: and then many nations and great kings shall serve themselves of him. And
it shall come to pass, that the nation and kingdom which will not serve the
same Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, and that will not put their neck under
the yoke of the king of Babylon, that nation will I punish, saith the Lord,
with the sword, and with famine, and with pestilence, until I have consumed
them by his handî (Jer. 27:5ñ8). Therefore ìbring your
necks under the yoke of the king of Babylon, and serve him and his people, and
liveî (v. 12). We see how great obedience the Lord was pleased to demand
for this dire and ferocious tyrant, for no other reason than just that he held
the kingdom. In other words, the divine decree had placed him on the throne of
the kingdom, and admitted him to regal majesty, which could not be lawfully
violated. If we constantly keep before our eyes and minds the fact, that even
the most iniquitous kings are appointed by the same decree which establishes
all regal authority, we will never entertain the seditious thought, that a king
is to be treated according to his deserts, and that we are not bound to act the
part of good subjects to him who does not in his turn act the part of a king to
us.

28. It is vain to object, that that command was specially given to the
Israelites. For we must attend to the ground on which the Lord places
itóìI have given the kingdom to Nebuchadnezzar; therefore serve
him and live.î Let us doubt not that on whomsoever the kingdom has been
conferred, him we are bound to serve. Whenever God raises any one to royal
honour, he declares it to be his pleasure that he should reign. To this effect
we have general declarations in Scripture. Solomon saysóìFor the
transgression of a land, many are the princes thereofî (Prov. 28:2). Job
saysóìHe looseth the bond of kings, and girdeth their loins with
a girdleî (Job. 12:18). This being confessed, nothing remains for us but
to serve and live. There is in Jeremiah another command in which the Lord thus
orders his peopleóìSeek the peace of the city whither I have
caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for it: for in
the peace thereof shall ye have peaceî (Jer. 29:7). Here the Israelites,
plundered of all their property, torn from their homes, driven into exile,
thrown into miserable bondage, are ordered to pray for the prosperity of the
victor, not as we are elsewhere ordered to pray for our persecutors, but that
his kingdom may be preserved in safety and tranquillity, that they too may live
prosperously under him. Thus David, when already king elect by the ordination
of God, and anointed with his holy oil, though causelessly and unjustly
assailed by Saul, holds the life of one who was seeking his life to be sacred,
because the Lord had invested him with royal honour. ìThe Lord forbid
that I should do this thing unto my master, the Lordís anointed, to
stretch forth mine hand against him, seeing he is the anointed of the
Lord.î ìMine eyes spare thee; and I said, I will not put forth
mine hand against my lord; for he is the Lordís anointedî (1 Sam.
24:6, 11). Again,óìWho can stretch forth his hand against the
Lordís anointed, and be guiltlessî? ìAs the Lord liveth the
Lord shall smite him, or his day shall come to die, or he shall descend into
battle, and perish. The Lord forbid that I should stretch forth mine hand
against the Lordís anointedî (l Sam. 24:9ñ11).

29. This feeling of reverence, and even of piety, we owe to the utmost to all
our rulers, be their characters what they may. This I repeat the oftener, that
we may learn not to consider the individuals themselves, but hold it to be
enough that by the will of the Lord they sustain a character on which he has
impressed and engraven inviolable majesty. But rulers, you will say, owe mutual
duties to those under them. This I have already confessed. But if from this you
conclude that obedience is to be returned to none but just governors, you
reason absurdly. Husbands are bound by mutual duties to their wives, and
parents to their children. Should husbands and parents neglect their duty;
should the latter be harsh and severe to the children whom they are enjoined
not to provoke to anger, and by their severity harass them beyond measure;
should the former treat with the greatest contumely the wives whom they are
enjoined to love and to spare as the weaker vessels; would children be less
bound in duty to their parents, and wives to their husbands? They are made
subject to the froward and undutiful. Nay, since the duty of all is not to look
behind them, that is, not to inquire into the duties of one another, but to
submit each to his own duty, this ought especially to be exemplified in the
case of those who are placed under the power of others. Wherefore, if we are
cruelly tormented by a savage, if we are rapaciously pillaged by an avaricious
or luxurious, if we are neglected by a sluggish, if, in short, we are
persecuted for righteousnessí sake by an impious and sacrilegious
prince, let us first call up the remembrance of our faults, which doubtless the
Lord is chastising by such scourges. In this way humility will curb our
impatience. And let us reflect that it belongs not to us to cure these evils,
that all that remains for us is to implore the help of the Lord, in whose hands
are the hearts of kings, and inclinations of kingdoms.65[8] ìGod standeth in the congregation of
the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.î Before his face shall fall and be
crushed all kings and judges of the earth, who have not kissed his anointed,
who have enacted unjust laws to oppress the poor in judgment, and do violence
to the cause of the humble, to make widows a prey, and plunder the fatherless.

30. Herein is the goodness, power, and providence of God wondrously displayed.
At one time he raises up manifest avengers from among his own servants, and
gives them his command to punish accursed tyranny, and deliver his people from
calamity when they are unjustly oppressed; at another time he employs, for this
purpose, the fury of men who have other thoughts and other aims. Thus he
rescued his people Israel from the tyranny of Pharaoh by Moses; from the
violence of Chusa, king of Syria, by Othniel; and from other bondage by other
kings or judges. Thus he tamed the pride of Tyre by the Egyptians; the
insolence of the Egyptians by the Assyrians; the ferocity of the Assyrians by
the Chaldeans; the confidence of Babylon by the Medes and
Persians,óCyrus having previously subdued the Medes, while the
ingratitude of the kings of Judah and Israel, and their impious contumacy after
all his kindness, he subdued and punished,óat one time by the Assyrians,
at another by the Babylonians. All these things, however, were not done in the
same way. The former class of deliverers being brought forward by the lawful
call of God to perform such deeds, when they took up arms against kings, did
not at all violate that majesty with which kings are invested by divine
appointment, but armed from heaven, they, by a greater power, curbed a less,
just as kings may lawfully punish their own satraps. The latter class, though
they were directed by the hand of God, as seemed to him good, and did his work
without knowing it, had nought but evil in their thoughts.

31. But whatever may be thought of the acts of the men
themselves,65[9] the Lord by
their means equally executed his own work, when he broke the bloody sceptres of
insolent kings, and overthrew their intolerable dominations. Let princes hear
and be afraid; but let us at the same time guard most carefully against
spurning or violating the venerable and majestic authority of rulers, an
authority which God has sanctioned by the surest edicts, although those
invested with it should be most unworthy of it, and, as far as in them lies,
pollute it by their iniquity. Although the Lord takes vengeance on unbridled
domination, let us not therefore suppose that that vengeance is committed to
us, to whom no command has been given but to obey and suffer. I speak only of
private men. For when popular magistrates have been appointed to curb the
tyranny of kings (as the Ephori, who were opposed to kings among the Spartans,
or Tribunes of the people to consuls among the Romans, or Demarchs to the
senate among the Athenians; and perhaps there is something similar to this in
the power exercised in each kingdom by the three orders, when they hold their
primary diets). So far am I from forbidding these officially to check the undue
license of kings, that if they connive at kings when they tyrannise and insult
over the humbler of the people, I affirm that their dissimulation is not free
from nefarious perfidy, because they fradulently betray the liberty of the
people, while knowing that, by the ordinance of God, they are its appointed
guardains.

32. But in that obedience which we hold to be due to the commands of rulers, we
must always make the exception, nay, must be particularly careful that it is
not incompatible with obedience to Him to whose will the wishes of all kings
should be subject, to whose decrees their commands must yield, to whose majesty
their sceptres must bow. And, indeed, how preposterous were it, in pleasing
men, to incur the offence of Him for whose sake you obey men! The Lord,
therefore, is King of kings. When he opens his sacred mouth, he alone is to be
heard, instead of all and above all. We are subject to the men who rule over
us, but subject only in the Lord. If they command anything against Him let us
not pay the least regard to it, nor be moved by all the dignity which they
possess as magistratesóa dignity to which no injury is done when it is
subordinated to the special and truly supreme power of God. On this ground
Daniel denies that he had sinned in any respect against the king when he
refused to obey his impious decree (Dan. 6:22), because the king had exceeded
his limits, and not only been injurious to men, but, by raising his horn
against God, had virtually abrogated his own power. On the other hand, the
Israelites are condemned for having too readily obeyed the impious edict of the
king. For, when Jeroboam made the golden calf, they forsook the temple of God,
and, in submissiveness to him, revolted to new superstitions (1 Kings 12:28).
With the same facility posterity had bowed before the decrees of their kings.
For this they are severely upbraided by the Prophet (Hosea 5:11). So far is the
praise of modesty from being due to that pretence by which flattering courtiers
cloak themselves, and deceive the simple, when they deny the lawfulness of
declining anything imposed by their kings, as if the Lord had resigned his own
rights to mortals by appointing them to rule over their fellows, or as if
earthly power were diminished when it is subjected to its author, before whom
even the principalities of heaven tremble as suppliants. I know the imminent
peril to which subjects expose themselves by this firmness, kings being most
indignant when they are contemned. As Solomon says, ìThe wrath of a king
is as messengers of deathî (Prov. 16:14). But since Peter, one of
heavenís heralds, has published the edict, ìWe ought to obey God
rather than menî (Acts 5:29), let us console ourselves with the thought,
that we are rendering the obedience which the Lord requires, when we endure
anything rather than turn aside from piety. And that our courage may not fail,
Paul stimulates us by the additional consideration (1 Cor. 7:23), that we were
redeemed by Christ at the great price which our redemption cost him, in order
that we might not yield a slavish obedience to the depraved wishes of men, far
less do homage to their impiety.

[6]51 651 French ìOn conte
trois especes de regime civil: cíest assavoir Monarchie, qui est la
domination díun seul, soit quíon le nomme Roy ou Due, ou
autrement: Aristoeratie qui est une domination gouvernee par les principaux et
gens díapparence: et Democratie, qui est une domination populaire, en
laquelle chacun du peuple a puissance.îó There are three kinds of
civil government; namely, Monarchy, which is the domination of one only,
whether he be called King or Duke, or otherwise; Aristocracy, which is a
government composed of the chiefs and people of note; and Democracy, which is a
popular government, in which each of the people has power.

[6]53 653 The French adds,
ìPourtant il est facile de conclure, quíen cette partie il ne
sont sujets a la loy commune; par laquelle combien que le Seigneur lie les
mains de tous les hommes, toutes fois il ne lie pas sa justice laquelle il
exerce par les mains des magistrats. Tout ainsi que quand un prince defend
[yacute] tou sses sujets de porter baston ou blesser aucun, il níempeehe
pas neantmoins ses officiers díexecuter la justice, laquelie il leur a
specialement commise.îóTherefore, it is easy to conclude, that in
this respect they are not subject to the common law, by which, although the
Lord ties the hands of all men, still he ties not his justice which he
exercises by the hands of magistrates. Just as when a prince forbids all his
subjects to beat or hurt any one, he nevertheless prohibits not his officers
from executing the justice which he has specially committed to them.

[6]59 659 The French adds,
ìCar les uns les faisoyent estans asseurez quíils faisoyent bien,
et les autres par autre zele (comme nous avons dit).îóFor the
former acted under the full conviction, that they were doing right, and the
latter, from a different feeling, as we have said.

[*] * THE ONE HUNDRED APHORISMS,
with the various TABLES and INDICES, which must greatly facilitate reference,
and enhance the utility and value of the present translation of THE INSTITUTES
OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, have been kindly furnished by the Rev. WILLIAM
PRINGLE of Auchterarder.